Hal Burgiss <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > On Sun, Dec 23, 2001 at 02:38:16PM -0800, Alan E Derhaag wrote: > > > the ethernet connection is up as is the PPP (PPPoA), among other > > status items. This request must be posted from the 192.168.1.2 > > address otherwise there is no response from the modem. > > > > I've attempted to connect another nic card to the modem's ethernet > > connection using DHCP, from my Linux box, but never get a response > > from it requesting from the 192.168.1.1 address over a direct ethernet > > connection (nothing else on the subnet). I've upgraded to dhcp-3.0 > > Have you tried it by assigning a static IP to the NIC, like > 192.168.1.2, and gateway of 192.168.1.1? I would think that should > work, and take the dhcp client out of the picture.
Yes, that does work but I get strange results like 'telnet <host> 80' will work for a HTTP connection but Netscape doesn't get past the IP resolution. I had hoped to use DHCP as it will query for PEERDNS and possibly complete the routing stuff for me. BTW, it was probably the lack of a hole in the firewall for ports 67 and 68 by my ipchains configuration that kept dhclient from seeing a return on its requests. > > > and no dhclient.conf configurations have yet been successful. > > Documentation of the pppoe indicates possible use of DHCP to establish > > the connection and IP addresses, although monitoring (with ethereal) > > the connection attempt for the WindozXP box never indicates use of > > PPPoE or PPPoA PADR packets. Arescom's web page for this modem type > > indicates either is a connection option with this modem. > > If the modem is handling this, which it sounds like, then you won't > see any of the PPP traffic. All that traffic is modem <-> DSLAM. PPPoA > doesn't run over ethernet anyway, which you say is what the modem is > doing. Yes, I'm aware the PPPoA is for ATM, not ethernet, but the NetDSL800u spec indicates both PPPoA and PPPoE are handled by the modem. Sorry, my first post was not clear about that. > > > Any other solutions you can advise short of running lynx software on > > the Windoz box to make it a server? > > Huh? I might have misspelled the name.. lynx.. linx.. something like that (heard over the telephone) sets up a file transfer environment from what I remember of using it for about 3 years ago. I must have been enhanced from the indication of an MSN tech (who's name will remain blameless). > > This setup is confusing me :/ Are the XP and linux boxes trying to > access the same modem at the same time? Is that the problem? Are you > sure the Linux NIC is functional? What I was indicating is there was no problem with the Windoz box making a connection but I want to switch the connectivity to my Linux box. It would be a direct connect of a nic card in my Linux box to the modem. I have to wait until my girl's are off the Windoz box so I can attempt the hardware and software changes tonight.. wish me luck, hoping ipchains was the only stopper in the process. _______________________________________________ Redhat-list mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] https://listman.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/redhat-list
